28-09-2002 03:52									#31
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

why didnt they just fix the health care laws in re: to pregnant women? the fact they they went and turned around the laws re: rights of embroys doesnt seem a very straightforward answer to the original problem. round your *ss to get to your elbow... for the benefit of some other factor.

all sounds especially Political to me. as if the plight of welfare mothers is secondary to the abortion rights issue. but "save the welfare mothers!" makes better press for the pres.

	28-09-2002 03:58									#32
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: I don't call myself pro-life really but that is the label that has been put on me because I support giving a voice to the unborn instead of killing "it" before it can make a choice.

So you support suicide then? If a 10 year old kid says he wants to die, and tries to kill himself you would let him do that?
It is his choice after all.

	28-09-2002 04:01									#33
	Increase the size of your Attachments

Winston and Lincoln, the use of a technically correct but irrelevant term is called 'spurious'.

GePap is absolutely correct. Sure, the pro-choice people are for the taking of a life. But since it isn't a human life, labeling pro-choice 'anti-life' is specious, as it doesn't convey any kind of information. By your definition, even Vegans are 'anti-life'.

	28-09-2002 04:56									#34
	Tired of ads?

That label would apply to pretty much anybody but the most hard-core Jainist.

If you want to beg the question through use of questionable definitions, then use "pro-murder." It cuts to the chase.

	28-09-2002 05:07									#35
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by Lemmy quote: I don't call myself pro-life really but that is the label that has been put on me because I support giving a voice to the unborn instead of killing "it" before it can make a choice. So you support suicide then? If a 10 year old kid says he wants to die, and tries to kill himself you would let him do that? It is his choice after all.

You get the prize for the most twisted argument of the day. No, I am not from the "pro-choice" side. You will have to eat your own argument. I never asserted that anyone has the right to let a child kill himself. If the pro-choice crowd was really for choice then you would let those who you kill grow up so that they could make a choice as well. What you are for is a choice for yourselves at the expence of those you silence.

	28-09-2002 05:14									#36
	Re: Anti-life crowd outraged that the unborn are cared for. Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Lincoln September 27, 2002 at 8:25:05 PDT Unborn Children to Get Health Care By LAURA MECKLER ASSOCIATED PRESS

Funny, the State of California already has public prenatal care health coverage.

Before my daugher was born 15 years ago (she was born in the US), there was no need to play semantic games as to whether she was an embryo, a fetus, an unborn child, or ET in order for prenatal care coverage to apply in my (work based) private health insurance.

The labeling game is a totally separate and unrelated issue.

	28-09-2002 05:45									#37
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Thanks, couldn't remember what album tha was on.

Glad to be of service.

	28-09-2002 06:06									#38
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Lincoln Would you also object if someone like Schindler in ww2 used deceptive means to save a Jew or another condemned person? If pro-life people really are sincere (and most I know are) then it would seem that the end justifies the means in this case.

Are you equating saving Jews with prenatal care? Or is it with undermining abortion rulings by the Supreme Court? In either case, your analogy is quite flawed. It's the ethical and moral nature of our party system that I'm opposed to. To make your analogy fit, I would be opposed to the Nazi regime as it wasn't ethical or moral IMO.

Each and every issue I try to judge on the same grounds, I don't pick sides and assume the other is wrong. In this issue I see one good thing, prenatal care, and another dishonest attempt to circumvent our constitutional process. As far as this legislation impacts the rights of a fetus, that isn't within the jurisdiction of Congress. That is up to the Supreme Court.

This legislation could have easily passed with Republican support if it just dealt with offering prenatal care to immigrant mothers who can't afford it on their own. I doubt anyone would have objected, Democrats have been asking for this sort of thing for a while now.

Instead, they took this popular issue, and linked it to another issue that wasn't so popular. They get certain things passed which otherwise would never pass, by sneaking it into more popular legislation. Then if someone opposes the legislation, they just cry out "What? You don't think (insert popular issue here) is important?" even though it's the unecessary baggage issues that are being opposed.

In short, prenatal care != fetus rights. It's just dishonest to try and implicate that it is.

	28-09-2002 06:15									#39
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

You completely missed the point. The point is, the use of unconventional means to accomplish a good deed. Yes this was a side door effort to change the language to be beneficial to the pro-life people but the result is good for the unborn

	28-09-2002 06:24									#40
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

It's not unconventional first of all. Almost all legislation passes with the barnacle issues that politicians slip in to appease special interest groups.

You say that giving a fetus rights is a good deed. Other people would disagree with you (when it interferes with the mother's rights, and before the fetus is viable). This issue should be resolved through the proper channels, which in this case is through the SC. Regardless of the 'right' or 'wrong' of the issue.

What you seem to be saying is that you support Congress in trying to undermine a SC ruling in a manner which isn't constitutional.

	28-09-2002 06:33									#41
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

My point was that if someone sincerely believes that they are saving an innocent life then the means are justified just as they would be if they ran a red light on the way to the hospital to save a life.

	28-09-2002 06:35									#42
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

Or if a person bombs an abortion clinic?

	28-09-2002 06:38									#43
	Got spare money?

How did you get to bombing abortion clinics? We are talking about using pollitical means to save the unborn not killing someone.

	28-09-2002 06:39									#44
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Or are you talking about destoying the building only?

	28-09-2002 06:47									#45
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

Sorry, but your Nazi analogy deserved to be reciprocated.

I do know what you are saying Lincoln, but circumventing due process, to force a special interest platform onto other people is just not right. You think that a fetus deserves rights, and you have the right to that opinion, but it's the SC which has the right to determine when one right infringes on another. I personally think abortion is a disgusting practice, even if it's deemed necessary or legal. I also find this sort of political behavior disgusting.

	28-09-2002 06:52									#46
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Well on that note, I am going to bed. Good night.

	28-09-2002 09:30									#47
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Lincoln, what Lemmy was pointing out is that it's two-faced to say that you want to save the unborn because it's unfair to deny them the choice of whether to live and then turn around and deny them that right yourself if one of them wants to kill himself. What you actually support, if I'm correct, is keeping people alive whether they want to be or not. Don't misrepresent your position. (Strangely enough, those who support the death penalty but oppose legal suicide would grant convicted murderes a right they would deny to law-abiding citizens -- the right to death.)

Also, chickens have embryos and fetuses which develop in chicken eggs. Obviously these are different from human embryos and fetuses. It has nothing to do with whether humans beget chickens or vice versa. Sheesh.

But there shouldn't even be a fertilized ovum in the eggs you buy at the store. Those are laid by hens kept separate from roosters, and thus they (the eggs) never get fertilized. At least that was my impression.

	28-09-2002 10:08									#48
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Heh. I predict it won't take terribly long for a pro-life activist to use the legislation as a springboard for some sort of effort to further control access to abortion. Tis human nature.

Gatekeeper

	28-09-2002 10:34									#49
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

My thoughts . . . just because I've never posted on the issue of abortion to date . . .

Aside from rape and the miniscule odds that widely available birth control doesn't work, women always have a choice whether or not to become pregnant. If a woman becomes pregnant (in circumstances other than those mentioned), she has made her choice in my opinion. Why should a woman have the right to exercise power over another life after the real choice was made?

Moreover, a growing number of scientific/medical studies show that abortions can lead to higher risk of breast cancer, infertility, various other physical conditions, as well as psychological difficulties. At the very least, women should be properly informed of the risks they take when having an abortion, which to my knowledge is not often happening.

There are irresponsible advocates of pro-life. No doubt! But, pro-life should not equal anti-choice. The goal of pro-life is empowering women to take responsibility for their minds and bodies so that they never find themselves in the position of having an unwanted pregnancy. Pro-life empowers women to make choices; it simply asks of them that they make those choices before another life becomes involved.

	28-09-2002 11:06									#50
	Suffering from ads?

I say, only women should be allowed to debate/vote on this argument. I'm sure it's easy for a guy to say that pregnancies should be carried to term, and then the child should be cared for, but often he has no part in it.


...but if you must know, I'm pro-choice.

	28-09-2002 11:10									#51
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: I say, only women should be allowed to debate/vote on this argument.

Does that mean men should only be allowed to debate/vote on prostate cancer?

	28-09-2002 11:27									#52
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Cancer is different, though...it's universally thought of as bad(I hope ). Abortion is a debatable issue, however, so only the persons actually involved in it should be considered.

	28-09-2002 11:49									#53
	Got spare money?

quote: Cancer is different, though...it's universally thought of as bad

What?!!! Cancer-cells are alive, man!!! And you want to kill them? You dirty dirty anti-lifer, you!!!!

	28-09-2002 12:13									#54
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Excellent point Gnu (and I swore I would never say this...).

	28-09-2002 12:15									#55
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

:P

	28-09-2002 12:26									#56
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Death is inevitable, all we do is just hasten its arrival. What's wrong with that?

	28-09-2002 13:17									#57
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Urban Ranger Death is inevitable, all we do is just hasten its arrival. What's wrong with that?

So you're agreed then that we should hasten it's arrival for Saddam Hussein?

	28-09-2002 18:35									#58
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

"What you actually support, if I'm correct, is keeping people alive whether they want to be or not."

No, I support letting innocent life in on the decision making process instead of silencing him while we debate the issue. Why not let the baby be born and then when he is old enough to decide if he wants to live you can include him in the deabate instead of killing him first and asking questions later?

If you are talking about the pros and cons of euthenasia then that is another issue but why do you exclude the innocent from that debate? Are you more qualified than she is to decide for her? Like I said before. The pro-choice crowd uses that term while they deny the choice to the innocent. A better discription of their position would be anti-choice for the innocent and pro-choice for those with power over him. So in other words you are in favor of more power for the powerful and no voice for the powerless and innocent. That is in a nut shell is selfishness, and that is the basis of the entire abortion movement.

	28-09-2002 23:33									#59
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Huh? What I said was, if you support a person's right to decide whether to live or not, you support the right to suicide. If you don't support the right to death, you may still support the right to life (for some people), but you certainly don't support the right of a person to choose between life and death for him- or herself. Don't confuse the two, or act like they're the same. They're not.

If that's still not clear: You say "I support letting innocent life in on the decision making process". But if you won't let the innocent life kill it/him/herself when and if it/he/she wants to, you don't support this at all -- you won't give the person the right to decide whether or not to live, only the right to life. Now do you see what I'm saying? If you don't give people this choice -- for themselves, not for their unborn children -- then you don't support greater freedom for anyone on this issue.

How am I excluding the innocent from the euthenasia debate?

And by the way, the terms both camps of the abortion debate use to describe themselves are inaccurate. You can oppose gun rights, increased immigration, drug legalization, and school vouchers and still be "pro-choice". You can favor war, guns, and the death penalty and still be "pro-life". The "pro-life" crowd can accurately be described as "anti-abortion", and I would hope they would have no problem with that, as they feel that abortion is bad. However, it would be misleading to call the "pro-choice" crowd "pro-abortion", as they don't necessarily favor more abortion, just the right to it. Calling them "pro-abortion" (or "anti-life") is like saying the Confederacy was "pro-slavery". And saying that the Civil War was fought over slavery is like saying that the American Revolution was fought over taxes, IMO. "Pro-abortion-rights" is cumbersome, though. There should be a better term, but I have no idea what it would be.

One final note: Opposition to stem cell reseach is decidedly not "pro-life". In the case of cloning, the only life taken is one that wouldn't even have existed had the research not been done. Otherwise, the embryo was going to be discarded anyway, so its life is not shortened when it is destroyed. Either way, the embryo is not robbed of life it otherwise would have had. But if the research does not take place, people will likely die who otherwise would have been saved. One columnist wrote a piece on how Bush has supported in-vitro fertilization as a means for infertile couples to have children. Yet this procedure is the very one in which embryos are created and then discarded! So did Bush

1. Play the issue simply for political points when he favored IVF?
2. Play the issue simply for political points when he set limits on federal funding for stem-cell research?
3. Just not know what the hell he was taling about?

	28-09-2002 23:46									#60
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by GePap Again, i don't think a fetus is a Human being, so terminating its life is not murder.

Well, if the fetus is not a human than it would not become a human.
This is great, you are alive and yet you would denied another his or her life.
A bullies will pick on a smaller person because if he pick on a person his size he might loose. So you and your kind will pick on an unborn baby because they cannot fight back.
One day the people who committed abortion (Murder in first degree) will face God, and God help them when they do.
BTW I have never kill anyone.